I first met Carl Elefante in China in 2016 at a two-day forum organized by Architecture 2030, titled “Towards a Zero Net Carbon Built Environment”. It was there that we introduced and defined the concept of zero net carbon as an essential and achievable goal for all buildings and developments worldwide. Carl, representing the American Institute of Architects, delivered one of the keynote addresses.
In the years since that landmark gathering, the concept of zero net carbon has expanded significantly, something Carl explores in his newly published book, “Going for Zero: Decarbonizing the Built Environment on the Path to Our Urban Future” (Island Press). The work also introduces readers to what he calls a “relevance revolution” in architecture and planning. In this interview, I ask Carl to elaborate on this concept and why he chose this moment to publish such a timely work.
Carl Elefante: Three macro trends are shaping the 21st century: the climate, justice, and urban imperatives. All three are inseparable from conditions in the built environment. For most architects, the climate imperative is a familiar issue. In a very compressed timeframe, everything about the design, construction, and operation of buildings must be retooled to eliminate greenhouse gas pollution, the principle factor driving global warming and climate change.
Yet climate change is not occurring in a vacuum. Here in the U.S., nearly every city and town struggles with intransigent social, economic, and environmental challenges. Many are the result of policies and actions initiated decades ago when social attitudes were very different. For example, originally conceptualized and promoted as “exclusionary zoning”, the stated purposes of zoning regulations that still control development today included segregating communities racially and economically. Current data shows that corrective measures started in the 1960s have not had much impact. Actions taken to arrest climate change will either exacerbate these issues or help resolve them.
Ironically, in my years of AIA leadership I found that very few architects are even aware of the underlying forces driving the urban imperative. Arguably, it is the most profound 21st century trend. In 2000, for the first time in human history more than half of global population lived in urban areas. By 2100, the UN estimates that nearly nine-in-ten people will. Human beings have become an urban species. Whatever the problem, the solution must be supported with appropriate built form. The relevance to architecture could not be more direct or powerful.
Edward Mazria: Can you describe and expand on the shift from an “expansion mindset” in the built environment to one of “reintegration and healing”?
CE: Another factor that defines our world today is the tremendous urban growth that occurred since the conclusion of World War II in highly developed countries like the U.S.. America is about to be crushed under an avalanche of mid-to-late 20th century buildings. This cohort of buildings is reaching an age when substantial reinvestment is necessary. Data across a broad spectrum of factors indicate that prioritizing reuse, adaptation, and repurposing modern-era buildings is the only workable path forward. Our profession is already seeing the evidence of the oncoming avalanche. In 2022, for the first time the AIA Architectural Billings Index (ABI) reported architectural fees for renovation exceeding those for new construction.
At the same time, many of the intransigent issues already mentioned are reinforced, if not largely caused, by conditions in the built environment that reflect the development priorities of the post-WWII era. The impact on urban form caused by the automobile is perhaps the most widely known example.
City centers still struggle to repair the torn urban fabric and devastated neighborhoods produced by prioritizing automobile infrastructure. And the health consequences and social alienation in auto-dependent suburban development have become acknowledged public health epidemics. In the book I use the terms reintegration and healing quite literally. The impact on human beings, both individually and collectively, in post-WWII development and building practices were not given much attention at the time. It is both a challenge and opportunity for today’s architects to correct those oversights and shortcomings.
EM: How would you like to see architectural education evolve to ensure the next generation of architects and planners are fully prepared to address the complexities of climate change and resilience, technological integration, and the social and environmental challenges of a rapidly urbanizing world?
As I became more and more involved in historic preservation and building reuse as a practicing architect, I marveled at the intelligence and resourcefulness embedded in buildings from past eras. Many of the lessons they teach are of great importance in facing the climate, justice, and urban imperatives.
For example, built heritage provides an encyclopedia of climate-adapted building practices. Our modern-era biases are so strong, that it is asking a lot of architects to accept that lessons from pre-modern times and un-modern places are not only relevant today, but in fact hold many keys for facing tomorrow’s challenges. Ed, I know that the lessons of built heritage is something you have understood throughout your professional life. You often speak of the debt your passive solar design principles owe to places like Mesa Verde.
When it is taught at all, most architectural education conveys the history of architecture as the evolution of visual style, missing the forest for the trees. Building traditions are more importantly evidence of the material and energy flows that made them possible and the multi-generational value proposition that made them worthy of investing such vast resources.
Today’s challenges call for deeper investigation into lessons of built heritage. My second wish for architectural education is to see building conservation and adaptive reuse mainstreamed into architecture – and engineering – design studio. Like the ABI, building stock data make it clear that today’s students will spend a great deal of their careers acting as stewards of the 20th century building stock. I am aware of no architecture program that sufficiently mainstreams existing building design.
EM: In the book you say that architects are “uniquely qualified to achieve the greatest good.” Why do you believe this and what gives you the most hope for the future of architecture and planning, and faith in the architect’s capacity to create positive change in the world? What specific skills and knowledge do architects bring to the table in addressing today’s complex challenges?
CE: For those of us who devote our careers to shaping the built environment, solving the design and technical challenges of architecture can be so demanding and rewarding that it is easy to take for granted architecture’s deeper human purposes.
In very real terms, architects shape lives. Architects create the spaces and places that accommodate virtually every human activity. Urban form and buildings have tremendous impact on individuals and society. The advancement of civilization and the evolution of built form are inseparable. In creating collective settlements – cities – people have for millennia invested in the greatest engines for human progress: engagement and cooperation.
EM: Step back for a minute to appreciate what architects do. Architects are entrusted to investigate human needs and aspirations, ideate future conditions, translate abstract concepts into tangible proposals, inspire others to coalesce around a shared vision, convince risk-averse institutions to invest vast resources, and orchestrate a complicated and time-consuming realization process.
Architects are extremely capable and highly trained professionals, by nature real contributors in any and every setting. And our belief in the power of design expresses a profound confidence that our works can and will improve lives. Look around, how many endeavors produce such substantial – literally concrete – outcomes and are motivated by such optimism and altruism?
CE: The obligations of architects to protect public health, safety, and welfare do not end with serving clients; it is where they begin. The challenges of the climate, justice, and urban imperatives were mostly unforeseen while creating the modern world in the 20th century; but, today they loom large. We know what is required to address them.
Our every act as shapers of the future either worsens or improves them. The skill sets of architects as conveners, coordinators, and communicators have never been more needed. And our training to investigate problems thoroughly and synthesize complex and sometimes contradictory priorities into integrated solutions with lasting value has never been more consequential.
